Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have already alluded to capital costs. I do not think that the Government would be totally excused from bringing in private investment or professional learning. There will be costs attached, but I do not know whether they reach the numbers that we are talking about in relation to the bill.

As I said, I am interested in the scrutiny of the bill. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and I look forward to seeing the outcome of that scrutiny and the associated financial memorandum, which will inform our considerations in that regard.

For statutory duties, I do not believe so, but I will bring in Nico McKenzie-Juetten to speak to that.

I think that it is legitimate to say that we have made a huge investment into play parks and they have been massively transformed. Speaking from personal experience, I see how busy our play parks are on a daily basis. They create new and better environments for our children and young people to experience outdoor learning, from the age of babies and toddlers, right through to teens.

I do not believe so. The regulations received strong support during the scrutiny of and discussions on the 2020 act, so it was felt that consultation was not required and would perhaps cause further delays.

I am sorry, but I do not understand the question.

Thank you for inviting me to provide evidence. The Scottish Government’s vision is that all children and young people should have the opportunity to engage in progressive and creative outdoor learning in all its forms, regularly, as part of the curriculum. The Government values the important work that residential outdoor centres do to support our young people’s mental and physical health, confidence, team-working skills, resilience, communication skills and personal development. As members might be aware, we gave the sector considerable support during the Covid pandemic, providing £4 million in funding to ensure that it could emerge from the pandemic.

In our future vision for the school curriculum, the Government sees a key role for the residential experience as part of a broad range of outdoor learning experiences, and we see a key role for outdoor learning in the three-to-18 journey for our young people. However, as we noted in the memorandum that we submitted to the committee, although we recognise the good intentions behind the bill, we have reservations about key elements of the provisions, which will require careful scrutiny. Some of those reservations have been touched on during the committee’s earlier evidence sessions and in other respondents’ feedback to the call for views.

First, the bill has a narrow focus on only one type of outdoor learning. Although the Government values the place of the residential experience, that is as part of a range of experiences. A legislative requirement on only one aspect of that range of experiences carries the risk of imposing an assumption on the way that practitioners go about determining the best approach to suit their learners’ needs. By legislating within the curriculum, the bill risks setting a precedent that contradicts our existing approach of flexibility and autonomy for school leaders and teachers, as envisioned in the curriculum for excellence.

A further area of concern relates to affordability and the financial estimates that are associated with the provisions as they are drafted. The Scottish Government’s view is that the bill’s financial memorandum significantly underestimates the potential overall cost of delivery to the public purse. On the basis of our initial analysis, we estimate that the potential cost range for year 1 roll-out in 2025-26 is between £24.3 million and £40.6 million. The difference between our higher estimate and what is presented in the financial memorandum is that we have attempted to model staff costs in secondary schools and inflation.

There are further costs that have not been fully articulated in the financial memorandum, such as the additional costs that are associated with provision for learners with additional support needs and special schools, which I know that the committee has a strong interest in. That suggests that the real delivery costs could be even higher.

As the committee will be aware, the Government is taking a neutral position on the bill, reflecting the fact that, although we note the good intentions behind it, it is essential that the Parliament tests and explores its potential implications in some depth. I am happy to take members’ questions.

Yes.

I do believe that there is a benefit, and I am happy to speak up in that respect. When I visited the Loch Eil outdoor learning centre in Fort William, I spoke to staff and some of the children who were benefiting from the experience there, and I heard about some of the really good impacts on behaviour, the different skills being learned, the experiences that the children and young people have, and relationships with teachers. However, those kinds of positive impacts can be found across a number of outdoor learning experiences; I would not say that they are necessarily exclusive to the outdoor learning centres.

That brings us back to one of the Government’s concerns about the scope of the bill and the fact that it is quite narrow in relation to outdoor learning centres. A lot of these positive impacts can be found in wider outdoor learning experiences.

Disclosure Scotland had always proposed to deliver the act in stages. That was discussed throughout the scrutiny of the bill. It was agreed as the best approach to ensure that we could work with and equally co-deliver the changes with stakeholders. It was also agreed at the time that there was a need for a fully digitised system that would support the statutory framework, ensuring that disclosure information flows safely, securely and in a timely manner.

With that in mind, Disclosure Scotland has implemented the legislative sections iteratively. Sections 63 and 89 of the 2020 act commenced on royal assent. From the point of royal assent until now, Disclosure Scotland has been managing several large and complex projects to successfully implement the rest of the 2020 act. I will bring in officials to talk through them, but they include the replacement of the previous system and platform.

Implementation was always planned to be incremental, due to the digitisation and to ensure that people are familiar with the different changes in the stages.